Dave

NCAA Football on ESPN/2 HD

$300 by Soul Coughing

If it's anything like politics, then it aint good news. Good news doesn't come out on Fridays.

The official press release states that the 360 and PS3 version will launch at the same time.

So after being first announced as a 360 game, Ubi called it a PS3 game for a while, and now is coming clean and calling it a simultaneous 360/PS3 game with a PC release as well.

Strangest behavior I've ever seen. Sony must have backed out of paying for a time exclusive. Why else would they bother with this little game, only to come clean in September (not helping the PS3 at all)? Must have had negotiations ongoing until recently.

"100. Yes, because I would not pay $600 for a video game console, but I would pay $600 for a video game console and Blu-ray video player (which go for $1000 on their own)."

But wouldn't you rather pay $400 for a great game console, and $200 for a HD video add-on if you feel like that's something you want? This is the trade-off we're talking about, not a $600 PS3 vs. a $1000 BR player. Remebering that BR adds close to nothing to the games, save for, as mentioned above, the ability to insert more HD pre-rendered videos into the "game".

Everybody will justify their decisions their own way. For those that think a $600 PS3 is an awesome deal because it doesn't cost as much as a standalone BR player (may as well compare the price to that of a car, it would be about as accurate), cool. From my perspective - a person who bought an HD ready set in 2000 and currently owns three in various sizes, and enjoys the hell out of HD content and gadgets - it doesn't make sense. I want a PS3 to play HD games, I don't want to buy a PS3 and cheap (and most likely, though I don't know this for a fact, low quality) BR player bundle. I want a PS3, and down the line I'll put $200 into a HD video player if I deem that to be appropriate. Unfortunately, I don't get that option, so I'll pass on the PS3 for the near term, and possibly all together.

The change from CD to DVD for games is nothing at all like what Sony is trying to push with the PS3.

DVD was an esablished technology, and there was a clear technical need for game consoles to increase the amount of storage available to them. BR is new, bleeding edge technology, and there is no clear technical need for game consoles to increase the storage available to them. The PS2 using DVD as its storage format is just incredibly different than the PS3 using BR. They can't even be compared.

"46. I'm just excited by more room for stuff. I mean, more space is more capability for things. Bigger canvas."

The BR-ROM would be more akin to having more paint. And not more colors, just bigger tubes. The canvas - the hardware in the device, things like RAM and processing power - is the same as the canvas the 360 has, essentially.

The BR PS3 issue isn't about anything other than "does my console need 50G of ROM today or 5 years from today?" The answer, by all logical projections, is no. Sony hasn't included BR for the benefit/need of games, they've included BR in hopes of leveraging the PS3 to push their storage format to victory. There is potentially huge money in owning the next big distribution format. So this, to the PS3 audience, isn't about a format war or any other issue ancillary to games. It's about why the consumer is being forced to subsidize Sony's latest attempt at owning a defacto standard. The PS3, as a game machine, would not have suffered one bit without a BR drive.

"22. alright, PS3 is the ONLY next gen console if you ask me. RD tvs will be obsolete by 2009, no more broadcasts in regular D folks, that means that TV's that dont support HD will no longer be able to display telvision. So why have a wii, that doesnt support HD. you will have to have two different TVs (one HD and one RD) so that you can have a good picture for your gaming, and also have a TV that can support TV. So its either playstation 3, or two TVs, which one is more expensive in your eyes."

Though your post screams "I know what I'm talking about", you're just a wee bit off. *Analog* broadcasting is being stopped, not SD, as in "Standard Definition" (I'm not sure what this "RD" is you speak of). And this only affects over-the-air broadcasting, not the stuff being carried by your cable system. If if cable companies do shut down analog transmissions - which they will, realistically - you see that handy little digital cable box they loan you? Yeah, that'll pretty much handle giving your old, analog set what it needs.

And even if your doomsday scenario were to occur - SD and ED sets will no longer be able to "display telvision", it has nothing to do with consoles. But I do hate when my telvision can't display telvision.

"Secondly, it allows for so much more. We all know (or should know) that the content able to be held on these discs is not only limited things like length of the game, etc. So much more can be allowed with a storage device that large, because so much more can be allowed to happen at once."

This is sarcasm, right? A bigger ROM device makes it so that "so much more can be allowed to happen at once." I want to hear how this theory pans out.

the last time I saw a similar phenomena was with Halo 2. All of the major sites raved about the single player, gave it scores in the high 9's. But a couple of smaller places saw some flaws, and called 'em out, scoring the game considerably lower than the majors did. Boy did the hardcore fans go nuts.

But as it turned out, the complaints were legit. I'm personally in the "halo 2 = the shit" camp, but a lot of people disagree and I can understand why.